Update Dec '10: Clinical trials and patents relevant to Asherman's syndrome

Clinical trials:

There are a number of trials involving the use of misoprostol for miscarriage management (note: I am not including studies on misoprostol use for pregnancy terminations because this choice is already routinely available to women who abort. It is not routinely- let alone occasionally-available to those who miscarry). As a blog which promotes prevention, these are naturally included. Below is more information and links to the studies.

Optimal Treatment of Miscarriage OR
Which is the Optimal Treatment for Miscarriage With a Gestational ac in the Uterus and Which Factors Can Predict if the Treatment Will be Successful?Region Skane, Kvinnokliniken, University Hopsital MAS Malmo Sweden.
Study type: Open labelled randomized trial (parallel assignment).
Aim: To compare the number of women with a complete miscarriage after 10 days between expectant management versus treatment with 800 micrograms of misoprostol intravaginally in women with an an incomplete miscarriage before 14 weeks and a gestational sac retained in the uterus.
link: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01033903?term=miscarriage&rank=5

A Randomized Trial of Two Regimens of Misoprostol for Second Trimester Termination for Intrauterine Fetal DeathAmerican University of Beirut Medical Center
Study type: Open labelled, randomized controlled crossover trial.
Aim: To compare the safety, efficacy and patient satisfaction of vaginal versus sublingual administration of misoprostol (400 mcg every 4 hours until delivery. Time frame=24 hours)
link: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00141895?term=misoprostol&rank=7

Sublingual Misoprostol Versus Standard Surgical Care for the Treatment of Incomplete AbortionGynuity Health Projects, Egypt, Mauritania, Niger.
Study type: Open labeled randomized controlled trial.
Aim: To compare the safety and efficacy of 400 mcg sublingual misoprostol to standard surgical curretage (D&C or MVA) for incomplete abortion (ie. retained products of conception). Presumably either spontaneous or induced.
link: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00466999?term=misoprostol&rank=50

Non Surgical Management for Uterine Residua After Pregnancy Termination, Abortion or DeliveryHaEmek Medical Center, Israel
Study type: open labelled randomized trial (parallel assignment)
Aim:To compare the outcome of misoprostol treatment (intravaginal, 800 mcg) and expectant management in the case of intrauterine residua after completion of pregnancy.
link: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01134926?term=misoprostol&rank=56

Misoprostol for Treatment of Fetal Death at 14-28 Weeks of PregnancyGynuity, California, Illinois, Boston, New York.
Study type: Double blinded randomized trial, parallel assignment.
Aim: To establish the safety and effectiveness of two different doses of the prostaglandin E1 analogue misoprostol administered buccally as a treatment for fetal death at 14 - 28 weeks, inclusive, of pregnancy.
link: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00671060?term=misoprostol&rank=24

Effect of Colony Stimulating Factor on Poor Endometrial Development During IVF
Official Title: G-CSF and Endometrial Growth, Embryo Implantation and Pregnancy Following FET or Donor ET
The Center for Human Reproduction (CHR) is conducting a double-blind, randomized cross over trial to investigate the effect of G-CSF on endometrial thickness in women who have failed reaching minimal endometrial thickness by standard treatments. Outcome measures will include endometrial thickness (must be >7mm for transfer), implantation and pregnancy rates compared to control patients. The study will be conducted in women undergoing transfer of previously cryopreserved embryos or transfer of embryos from donor eggs. 

There are published studies on the use of Vitamin E (tocopherol), Pentoxyfilline, and Sildenafil in women with a thin endometrium (some of whom have a history of Asherman’s syndrome (1-4)). To my knowledge this is the first trial using G-CSF for this purpose.
For more information see:
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01202643?term=asherman+syndrome&rank=1

Safety of Leaving Cook Balloon Uterine Stent in Uterus for One Month
The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shin-Kong Wu-Ho-Su Memorial Hospital in Taiwan is conducting an open label randomized controlled trial to investigate the feasibility of leaving an intrauterine Cook balloon in the uterus for 1 month. The experimental arm of the study will be fitted with a uterine Cook stent while the control will not. Both groups will have swabs taken for culture just before hysteroscopic adhesiolysis and 30 days later, during second look hysteroscopy to evaluate the outcome of surgery.

The practice of leaving a Cook Balloon stent in the uterus for this length of time is used by some Asherman’s syndrome specialists in cases of severe and recurrent intrauterine adhesions (personal communication). In the above study there is no mention of antibiotic use, however the specialists that use the Cook balloon or Foley catheter prescribe antibiotic prophylaxy during the entire therapy to prevent the potential infection. The results of the study will also reveal the effectiveness of the Cook balloon in preventing adhesion recurrence compared to no stent. Previously there was a study comparing the IUD (3 cycles) to the Foley catheter (10 days), however the method of ‘adhesiolysis’ was blind D&C, not dissection of adhesions under direct hysteroscopic view (5). As blind D&C is the most common cause of intrauterine adhesions, it is difficult to know if the previous findings are due to the barrier method used or to fortuitous variations in the success of ‘surgery’ which is carried out blindly.

For more information see: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01167296?term=uterine+adhesions&rank=2


SIGnificance of Routine Hysteroscopy Prior to a First 'in Vitro Fertilization'(IVF) Treatment Cycle (inSIGHT)
A multicenter single-blinded (caregiver) randomized intervention trial is being undertaken in the Netherlands to assess the cost effectiveness of screening women for intauterine abnormalities using hysteroscopy and SIS (saline infusion sonography) prior to fertility treatment (IVF/ICSI). If abnormalities are found (defined as the existence of a septum, endometrial polyp, submucous myoma, adhesions or endometritis) these will be treated on the spot, using scissors, Versapoint, grasping forceps, polypsnare or antibiotics. The primary outcome measure is cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth after randomization within 18 months of IVF/ICSI. Secondary outcome measures include cumulative implantation rates, miscarriage rates, and comparative cost calculations.

Studies have shown that minor intrauterine abnormalities can be found in 11-40% of infertile women with a normal tranvaginal sonography. Detection and treatment of these abnormalities by office hysteroscopy have led to a 9-13% increase in pregnancy rate. Therefore, it is increasingly advised to screen all infertile women on intracavitary pathology prior to the start of IVF/ICSI.

Note that women with recurrent miscarriage are excluded from the study, when it is known that women with uterine abnormalities (congenital or acquired) are at a risk of repeated pregnancy loss. This exclusion is perhaps added in order to eliminate women who have other causes of infertility that are not due to anatomical anomalies and which cannot be diagnosed and corrected via hysteroscopy. However, this possible bias could have been avoided by excluding women who tested positive for other conditions known to cause recurrent miscarriage. I also wonder how effective outcomes will be in the experimental arm if IVF/ICSI is commenced immediately after treatment, without assessing the state of the cavity (IUA often recur, and IUA are a common consequence of septum correction and myomectomy). Furthermore, would it not be possible to answer this clinical question by reviewing the prevalence of uterine abnormalities in infertile and subfertile women, the cumulative implantation, pregnancy and live birth rates following treatment of these conditions, and analyzing the costs versus benefits ratio? For example, if past studies have shown that more than 10% of infertile women have an intrauterine pathology, and 40% of these women have a live birth after treatment, is it not justified to perform a diagnostic hysteroscopy prior to IVF/ICSI?

For more information: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01242852?term=uterine+adhesions&rank=8

Note: There appears to be an error in the table describing the intervention and control arms of the study.

Patents

Patent Applications:
WO 2010/05/054068 A2 Cyclic adenosine monophosphates (cAMPs) for reducing the formation of adhesions. This world patent application claims the use of various derivatives of cAMPs for the reduction of adhesion formation for reducing inflammation or tissue damage after abdominal or pelvic surgery.
Jackson, EK. Cyclic adenosine monophosphates for reducing the formation of adhesions. 14 May 2010.
More info http://www.ibridgenetwork.org/university-of-pittsburgh/cyclic-adenosine-monophosphates-for-reducing-the-formation-of

In contrast to adhesion barriers, the invention would not involve placing a foreign body in the surgical cavity. Present adhesion barriers can cause immunological reactions. Also, the cyclic adenosine monophosphates are naturally-occuring substances and therefore should be quite safe. The cyclic adenosine monophosphates can be quickly and easily administered with a syringe. It can be used in minimally-invasive surgery, the future of surgery, and should be effective even if blood is in the surgical field. It is likely that the invention will be more efficacious than existing adhesion barriers.

Theoretically it could also be useful for intrauterine adhesions as many of the gel barriers used for pelvic surgery are also being used/trialled post adhesiolysis in Asherman’s syndrome treatment.So far there are only limited data on the efficacy of gel barriers in the treatment of Asherman’s syndrome (6-8). One of the difficulties of using gels is that they do not stay in a fixed position which is essential for them to be effective.

Granted Patents:
2005/0084,508 A61K Topical anesthesia formulation for bodily cavities
Innovators: Vancaillie, Thierry G; Hewitt, Alan Ernest
A topical anesthetic used for in-office hysteroscopy has recently been patented. The pH is adjusted to that of the body’s to optimize the effectiveness of the anesthetic.One of the inventors is an Asherman’s syndrome specialist. He has also developed a device for administering the anesthetic.
More info: http://www.patentbuddy.com/patentdetails/2402425


References
1. Acharya S, Yasmin E, & Balen AH. The use of a combination of pentoxifylline and tocopherol in women with a thin endometrium undergoing assisted conception therapies – a report of 20 cases Human Fertility, December 2009; 12(4): 198–203.
2. Batailles N, Oliviennes F, Lefaix JL, Chaouat G, Frydman R, Delanian S. Combined treatment by pentoxifylline and tocopherol for recipient women with a thin endometrium enrolled in an oocyte donation programme. Hum Rep 2002;17(5):1249-53.
3. Sher G, Fisch D. Effect of vaginal sildenafil on the outcome of in vitro fertilization (IVF) after multiple IVF failures attributed to poor endometrial development. Fertil Steril. 2002 Nov;78(5):1073-6.
4. Zinger M, Liu Thomas JH, MA. Successful Use of Vaginal Sildenafil Citrate in Two Infertility Patients with Asherman’s Syndrome. JOURNAL OF WOMEN’S HEALTH 2006;15(4):,442-4.
5. Orhue AA, Aziken ME, Igbefoh JO. A comparison of two adjunctive treatments for intrauterine adhesions following lysis. Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2003;82:49-56.
6. Abbott J, Thomson A, Vancaillie T. SprayGel following surgery for Asherman’s syndrome may improve pregnancy outcome. J Obstet Gynaecol 2004;24:710-1.
7. Acunzo G, Guida M, Pellicano M, Tommaselli GA, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Bifulco G, et al. Effectiveness of auto-cross-linked hyaluronic acid gel in the prevention of intrauterine adhesions after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Hum Reprod2003;18:1918-21.
8. Metwally M, Watson A, Lilford R, Vandekerckhove P. Fluid and pharmacological agents for adhesion prevention after gynaecological surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2006;(2): CD001298. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001298.pub3.

Relevant links:
Understanding Clinical Trials

Misoprostol for miscarriage management: the facts and the fiction

This is my latest Youtube video presentation. It explains the truth behind often repeated misinformation about misoprostol.

Misoprostol for miscarriage management is underused despite evidence of its efficacy and safety. It is an ideal alternative to D&C. It can also prevent Asherman's syndrome which mainly occurs from D&C, a blind surgery. This clip clarifies concerns about misoprostol which may be hindering its use by clinicians and patients alike.

FAQs Asherman's syndrome

Please see the new page on frequently asked questions about Asherman's syndrome. You can also click on the relevant tab button in the tab bar at the top of the page to view it.

Focus on the medical literature: Misoprostol for early pregnancy failure is underused despite efficacy and safety .

Article: Provider knowledge, attitudes, and treatment preferences for early pregnancy failure.

Dalton VK, Harris LH, Gold KJ, Kane-Low L, Schulkin J, Guire K, Fendrick AM. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jun;202(6):531.e1-8. Epub 2010


The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology has recently published an article, ‘Provider knowledge, attitudes and treatment preferences for early pregnancy failure’ (EPF),which explores the relationship between health provider attitudes and associated factors and the methods they use for treating miscarriage. Ever since acquiring Asherman’s syndrome from a D&C for an incomplete miscarriage because I was spuriously denied medical management, I have been curious to find out what proportion of Obstetricians offer misoprostol to their patients. This will vary from country to country. My understanding is that many countries in continental Europe are more progressive in adopting misoprostol use than the US, England, Australia and New Zealand. I know from personal experience that in Australia the use of misoprostol for first trimester or early second trimester miscarriage management is rare. I have also learned that even when it is used, the hospital protocols are strict and dosages are in accordance with only second trimester termination, as illogical and ineffective as this may be for other gestational ages.


My interest in the article of course stems from an angle of Asherman’s syndrome prevention, whereas cost effectiveness was the main interest of the study. For this reason, the researchers were focused on the frequency of misoprostol and office uterine evacuations, both of which are far less expensive than operating room (OR) surgical evacuations. This is mainly due to operating room and anesthesiologist costs of OR D&C (the patient is awake during in-office D&C). Thus, the authors consider all treatment options (expectant or medical management, office, and OR procedures) to be reasonable, and that patient preferences should be the deciding factor in treatment choice. It should be mentioned that the same group authored case reports alerting that even gentle manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) (a type of office uterine evacuation) can lead to symptomatic IUA ie. Asherman’s syndrome (1). This is not surprising given that blind instrumentation is involved.


There is a plethora of clinical studies in the medical literature supporting the efficacy and safety of misoprostol (click here) for treatment of early pregnancy failure (2,3) as well as for abortion. Yet there is a discrepancy between the established research findings and its level of use in practice. Although the problem of failing to adopt evidence-based treatments is a common problem it is especially so in women’s health (4,5,6). Therefore, practitioners are usually slow to offer new treatment methods, even when these are known to be effective, safe, and offer advantages to traditional treatments. Thus, clinicians have the power to influence patient treatment, rather than letting the patient choose how her miscarriage is managed (7,8). It is unclear whether all treatment options are routinely offered or available to women who experience early pregnancy failure (9).


The study hypothesized that most providers do not routinely offer patients all acceptable treatment options, and that factors such as knowledge and perceived obstacles to adopting new methods might be associated with sex, specialty, years of practice, and training.


In particular they sought answers from health providers with respect to each treatment method regarding :


-attitudes about treatment safety (and I would add efficacy) (Treatment Preference)
-perceptions of patient acceptance of options (Perception of patient preferences)
-provider comfort with the options (Use of treatments)



For misoprostol and office uterine evacuations they looked at additional factors.


The study was carried out as a written survey which was sent out to Obstetrician-gynecologists (‘Obgyns’), certified nurse midwives/midwives (‘nurses/midwives’), and family physicians (‘GPs’) in the United States.


From the point of view of Asherman’s syndrome prevention, the focus will be on the paper’s relevant outcomes with regards to use of the non-invasive alternatives misoprostol and expectant management compared to OR surgical evacuation (ie. D&C). Also, I am adding a few interpretations which were not mentioned in the article. These are in blue font.

D&C Treatment preference-Obgyns preferred uterine evacuation in the operating room over other methods (45.7%)(No surprise there…) Perception of patient preferences -Interestingly, Obgyns believed OR D&C was the more preferable treatment than their patients (28.4% vs 15.5%; P<.001, perceived Obgyn and patient rank, respectively). It is unclear whether this reflects a higher level of confidence than their patients in the procedure or if the preference is influenced by financial factors. Note that 21.8% of Obgyns in the study expressed concern regarding reimbursement for in office uterine evacuations- the identical procedure to their self-declared preferred method, the much costlier operating room D&C including anesthesiologist. Use of treatments -Obgyns reported using OR D&C more than the other options and nurses/midwives and GPs. -38.9% of Obgyns used D&C in over half of all patients in the past 6 months.

Expectant management Treatment preference -Nurses/midwives and GPs were the most likely to prefer expectant management (55.2% and 64.5% , respectively) -Obgyns were the least likely to report expectant management as their most preferred treatment Perception of patient preferences -Health provider’s belief regarding patient preference of expectant management mirrored their own. Use of treatments -Obgyns were less likely than the others to use expectant management (12.3% compared to 30.4% and 43.4% for nurses/midwives and GPs, respectively).

Misoprostol Treatment preference -Obgyns, nurses/midwives and GPs chose misoprostol as the second preferred treatment method (33.2%, 61.8% and 60.7% respectively). Perception of patient preferences -Health provider’s belief regarding patient preference of misoprostol management mirrored their own. Use of treatments Misoprostol (along with office uterine evacuations) were the least commonly used treatment options. -Most providers had not used misoprostol at all in the past 6 months for EPF treatment. - Over the last 6 months, 52.7% of Obgyns reported not using it even once. - Obgyns were still more likely than the others to use misoprostol but only 5% of them reported using it in over half of their patients in the last 6 months. -67.9% and 84.1% of nurses/midwives and GPs, respectively, reported not ever using misoprostol in the last 6 months.

Provider factors influence on use of misoprostol -sex and race: Not associated with use of misoprostol -Safety: providers who believed that misoprostol is safe used it more than those that did not. Disturbingly, 29.7% of Obgyns, 36.2% of nurses/midwives, and 37.8% of GPs did not agree with the statement “Misoprostol is safe.” (This mindset counters evidence-based medicine and requires further examining). -Low patient demand: 34.7% of GPs claimed little patient demand was a barrier, versus 18.2% of Obgyns and 15.7% of nurses/midwives. (Is this really a valid excuse not to at least offer it?) -prior induced abortion training: Not significantly associated with misoprostol use. (I wonder if training in misoprostol use specifically for EPF management exists) -Other perceived obstacles to using misoprostol included lack of surgical or nursing backup/support. (Paradoxically these do not appear to hinder the preference of nurses/midwives or GPs for expectant management).

Conclusions
-EPF management is still largely dominated by operating room uterine evacuations (Obgyns) and expectant management (nurses/midwives and GPs) even though the efficacy and safety of misoprostol is well established.


-targeting inaccurate beliefs about the safety of misoprostol and clarifying patient preferences may increase the willingness of providers to adopt new practices to meet patient needs.


Note: -This study does not delineate how much patient preferences account for current treatment patterns, however: 

-Women vary in their treatment preferences, therefore providing access to a wide range of services will improve care.


-clinical trials suggest that misoprostol is acceptable and may be preferred by many women over surgical evacuation especially when successful and when surgery is performed without anesthesia eg. in office (10,11,12,13).


-Improvements in services for EPF, one of the most common clinical problems encountered by women of reproductive age, will have a strong impact on patient experience and satisfaction (I would add also from the point of view of Asherman’s syndrome prevention).


REFERENCES

1. Dalton, VK, Saunders, NA, Harris, LH, Williams, JA, and Lebovic, DI. Intrauterine
adhesions after manual vacuum aspiration for early pregnancy failure. Fertil Steril
2006;85(6):1823 e1-3.

2. Zhang, J, Gilles, JM, Barnhart, K, Creinin, MD, Westhoff, C, and Frederick, MM.
A comparison of medical management with misoprostol and surgical management
for early pregnancy failure. N Engl J Med 2005;353(8):761-9.

3. Trinder J, Brocklehurst P, Porter R, Read M, Vyas S, Smith L. Management of miscarriage: expectant, medical, or surgical? Results of randomized controlled trial (miscarriage treatment (MIST) trial). BMJ 2006;332:1235-40.

4. Cabana MD, Kim C. Physician adherence to preventive cardiology guidelines for women. Women’s Health Issues 2003;13:142-9.

5. Haagen EC, Nelen WL, Hermens RP, Braat DD, Grol RP, Kremer JA. Barriers to physician adherence to a subfertility guideline. Hum Reprod 2005;20:3301-6.

6. Harper CC, Blum M, de Bocanegra HT, et al. Challenges in translating evidence to practice: the provision of intrauterine contraception. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111:1359-69.

7. Gurmankin AD, Baron J, Hershey JC, Ubel PA. The role of physicians’ recommendations in medical treatment decisions. Med Decis Making 2002;22:262-71.

8. Molnar AM, Oliver LM, Geyman JP. Patient preferences for management of first-trimester incomplete spontaneous abortion. J Am Board Fam Pract 2000;13:333-7.

9. Dalton VK, Harris LH, Clark SJ, Cohn L, Guire K, Fendrick AM. Treatment patterns for early pregnancy failure in Michigan. J Women’s Health 2009;18:1-7.

10. Moodliar, S, Bagratee, JS, and Moodley, J. Medical vs. surgical evacuation of firsttrimester spontaneous abortion. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;91(1):21-6.

11. Bique, C, Usta, M, Debora, B, Chong, E, Westheimer, E, and Winikoff, B. Comparison of misoprostol and manual vacuum aspiration for the treatment of incomplete abortion. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2007;98(3):222-6.

12. Lee, DT, Cheung, LP, Haines, CJ, Chan, KP, and Chung, TK. A comparison of the psychologic impact and client satisfaction of surgical treatment with medical treatment of spontaneous abortion: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185(4):953-8.

13. Graziosi GC, Bruinse HW, Reuwer PJ, Mol BW. Women’s preferences for misoprostol in case of early pregnancy failure. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005;124:184-6.

Doctor’s orders: in support of Ashermans syndrome prevention and/or alternatives to D&C.

Here's what the doctors have written over the years in support of preventing Asherman's syndrome from occuring and more recently, in support of alternative methods to D&C for miscarriage management. This list is not exhaustive and I may add to it in future. There is so much evidence in the medical literature and knowledge among some doctors at least, that it is difficult to reconcile it with current medical practices. 'Translational research' might be the current buzz word at research centers, hospitals and universities, but how quickly this progress is incorporated into routine or widespread practice is entirely another matter. This is where patients need to speak up to encourage change, and why patients need to educate themselves and others first. Reading the research is the only way to get an overall view of the established facts rather than relying only on second hand information from others who may have vested interests or other agendas.

(my additions are in blue)


1. Toaf and Ballas, 1978 (1):

"Peurperal curettage…was discontinued in Israel after publication of Asherman’s observations.”

This is not so in the US, UK, Australia and many other countries. Also, curettage remains standard care for treating miscarriage in many countries (while abortion is now usually carried out medically).

2. Li et al, 2001 (2):

After vaginal delivery, a retained placenta may cause a risk to maternal health because of hemorrhage or infection. …manual removal of the retained placenta is a routine procedure. ..This invasive procedure increases risk of trauma*, rupture of uterus, hemorrhage, postpartum infection, and anesthetic complications.”

* Asherman’s syndrome may result

“In all 18 parturients, spontaneous expulsion of the placenta developed in an average interval of 12 min (range from 5 to 35 min) after rectal insertion of misoprostol.”

3. Friedler et al, 1993 (3):

“The incidence of IUA might be lower following medical evacuation of the uterus, thus avoiding any intra-uterine instrumentation; however, use of progesterone antagonists (ie, mifepristone) for this purpose is not yet approved by the Israeli Ministry of Health.”

4. Chapman and Chapman, 1990 (4):

“One must also note that the suction curette is capable of causing synechiae, usually, however in the region of the internal os.”
“It is noteworthy that, of the 11 patients with isthmus stenosis, six of them were attributable to termination of pregnancy, of which all but one had been performed by suction curettage”
“It goes without saying that, in view of the seriousness of the sequelae, the best management is prevention…”

3. Tam et al, 2002 (5):

“No cases of IUA were found in patients managed conservatively or by medical evacuation, whereas 2 cases (7.7%) of filmy IUA were detected in those managed by surgical evacuation.”

“We therefore recommend expectant management and medical evacuation as first-line treatment for complete abortion* and incomplete abortion*, respectively. Surgical evacuation should be the treatment of choice when {these methods} fails or is contraindicated.”
*ie miscarriage

6. Goldenberg et al, 1997 (6):
“Selective curettage of residual trophoblastic tissue directed by hysteroscopy is an easy and short procedure and might be preferable to conventional, nonselective, blind curettage.”

“…areas not covered by residual tissue…are not subject to surgical trauma during the selective procedure and presumably are therefore exposed to lower risks of inflammation, scarring and adhesion formation”

“Incomplete removal of the residua is more likely to occur during repeated conventional curettage, even if guided by ultrasonography, as had occurred in two of our patients. Direct visualization of the cavity allows…the exact location and extent of the residual tissue to be resected.”

7. Yu et al, 2008 (7):

“Prevention of Asherman Syndrome
Prevention is always better than cure. To prevent the formation of endometrial fibrosis and adhesions, it is essential that any trauma to the uterus be avoided, especially in the pregnant or postpartum state.”

They go on to recommend:
“Avoid postpartum or postabortion curettage”
“Diagnosis of retained products of conception …present a clinical challenge.
…Saline infusion sonohysterography (SHG) has enhanced our ability to diagnose retained products of conception (8)”
“…transvaginal B-mode ultrasonography combined with color velocity imaging and pulsed Doppler to detect retained trophoblastic tissue…could be useful to…select patients suitable for conservative management.(9)”
“Transvaginal duplex Doppler ultrasonography is also an effective noninvasive method for evaluating patients with persistent postpartum hermorrhage (10).”

"…hysteroscopy should be considered an effective method for diagnosis and treatment of retained products of conception." They cite the Goldenberg et al (6) study (see above).
…
“Select medical management of miscarriages
When termination of early pregnancy is necessary, medical treatment should be considered instead of surgical options.”
They cite the Tam et al study (5)(see above).

“Since its introduction, the uptake of medical abortion has been steadily increasing in countries where it has been available for routine use….Similarly, in the management of incomplete miscarriage or delayed miscarriage, expectant or medical treatment should be considered.”

7. Chung et al, 1995 (11):

“The accepted management of spontaneous abortion has not changed substantially in 60-70 years.”

“The policy of routine, universal evacuation of retained products of conception (ERPC) became the accepted form of management around the 1930s to combat [these*] complications. However, this approach may no longer be appropriate in all cases.”
*hemorrhage, infection.

“…in the United Kingdom, 90% of spontaneous abortions are managed [by ERPC] (12). Confidence in routine ERPC as the unquestioned ‘gold standard’ may no longer be justified. There may be alternative approaches that are less invasive but equally effective without incurring greater morbidity.”

“Transvaginal sonography can identify approximately one in three women with a spontaneous abortion who do not have a significant amount of retained tissue in the uterus.”

“Surgical intervention in {women who do not have a significant amount of retained tissue in the uterus} may unnecessarily incur iatrogenic complications without therapeutic gain.”


8. Demetroulis et al, 2001 (13):

“Surgical curettage under anaesthesia accounts for almost three-quarters of emergency gynaecological operations performed in the UK (14). However, dilatation and suction evacuation of the uterus under anaesthesia has certain morbidity, such as the risk of anaesthesia, uterine perforation, intrauterine adhesions, cervical trauma, and infections leading to infertility, pelvic pain and increased chance of ectopic pregnancy.”

9. Moodliar et al, 2005 (15):

“Moreover, surgical evacuation of retained products of conception (ERPC) is performed in the operating room, which significantly increases costs. Inherent in the procedure are the possible complications of perforation, hemorrhage, cervical trauma, intrauterine adhesions and postinstrumentation endometritis.”

“As an alternative, medical management has been found to be cost-effective and associated with fewer complications…Yet in South Africa*, incomplete abortion is still being managed by surgical evacuation.”

*in Australia and in many other countries too!

10. Muffley et al, 2002 (16):

“Curettage has been traditionally used as the surgical method of treatment. It has been estimated that approximately 100,000 uterine curettages are performed annually in the United States, at a total yearly cost of >100 million (17). Uterine curettage is associated with …hemorrhage and infection. Uterine adhesions, impaired future fertility, cervical trauma, uterine perforation, and anesthesia errors are also other potential sequelae of curettage.”

“In the late 1980s single-dose methotrexate therapy was introduced for the treatment of unruptured ampullary ectopic gestations (18). Nearly 10 years later, this medical therapy has replaced laparotomy or laparoscopy in many circumstances (19). At this time, however, medical treatment of early pregnancy failure is still in its infancy in the United States. On completion of multicenter randomized clinical trials, we believe that medical treatment will replace surgical therapy as the initial treatment of early pregnancy failure.”

(I hope so!)

Comment by Dr Lisa Fall:
“Firstly, as the trend toward later childrearing continues, we are faced with an increased incidence of pregnancy failure because of advancing gestational [ sic maternal] age. Our patients are interested in noninvasive options for treatment to avoid possible complications that may have an impact on future fertility.”
(Yup, that was me, but I was refused)
11. Zhang et al, 2005 (20):

“For most of the 20th century, dilatation and curettage was the commonly accepted approach to early pregnancy failure. This practice can be traced back to the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when illegally induced abortions commonly resulted in hemorrhage and sepsis (21). With the legalization of abortion and the availability of antibiotics, these problems have become rare. In more recent years, the medical community began to question whether immediate evacuation by surgical intervention was necessary for uncomplicated cases of early pregnancy failure (12,17).”

12. Stockheim et al, 2006 (22):

“Over the past decade, elective medical termination of pregnancy using a protocol that includes mifepristone and misoprostol was accepted into wide practice. This drug regimen was consistently shown to be associated with high success rates of 90-95% (23-26). However, medical treatment of pregnancy failure (blighted ovum or spontaneous abortion) has not yet gained wide acceptance.”

“Misoprostol is an effective and safe treatment for early pregnancy failure and could replace surgical curettage in over two-thirds of the patients.”

13. Creinin et al, 2006 (27):

“As clinicians and researchers, we must ask why women with an undesired normal pregnancy can receive a treatment regimen that is more effective than that tested for women with a desired abnormal pregnancy. The information presented in this analysis will allow us to better tailor misoprostol treatment for early pregnancy failure.”

I would also add, why women with an undesired normal pregnancy only have access to the mifepristone/misoprostol regimen which preserves fertility while those who miscarry do not.

14. Pang et al, 2001 (28):

“Misoprostol is justified as a first line treatment in the management of miscarriage in all cases because firstly it will avoid surgical intervention altogether in a proportion and secondly, in those who need it, misoprostol reduces surgery-related morbidity, mainly by priming the cervix (29.)”

15. Blanchard et al, 2004 (30):

“A growing body of research evidence indicates that medical treatment of incomplete abortion with misoprostol is an effective alternative to surgical intervention. Misoprostol could be an important alternative to dilatation and curettage or manual vacuum aspiration for treatment of incomplete abortion, allowing women to avoid surgical intervention and the attendant risks. Misoprostol is inexpensive and widely available and may also be more acceptable to women than the current standard of care.”

16. Shaw D, The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) President (31):

“Furthermore, women have the right to benefit from advances in scientific knowledge and since women brought unapproved, reproductive health use of misoprostol to the attention of health professionals, it is especially fitting that they now benefit from the research into such use.”

17. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Committee Opinion, 2009 (32):

“In addition, there is increasing evidence that misoprostol is a safe, effective,and acceptable method to achieve uterine evacuation for women needing postabortion* care.”

“Misoprostol may be used to treat women with an incomplete and missed abortion.”

* Postabortion care: “… refers to a specific set of services for women experiencing problems from all types of spontaneous or induced abortions.”
 REFERENCES

1. Toaff R, Ballas S (1978). Traumatic hypomenorrhea-amenorrhea (Asherman's syndrome). Fertil. Steril. 30 (4): 379–87.
 2. Li YT, Yin CS, Chen FM. Rectal administration of misoprostol for the management of retained placenta- a preliminary report. Chinese Medical Journal (Taipei) 2001;64:721-4.
 3. Friedler S, Margalioth EJ, Kafka I, Yaffe H. (1993). Incidence of postabortion intra-uterine adhesions evaluated by hysteroscopy: a prospective study. Hum Reprod 8 (3): 442–444.
 4. K Chapman and R Chapman. Asherman's syndrome: a review of the literature, and a husband and wife's 20-year world-wide experience. J R Soc Med. 1990 September; 83(9): 576–580.

5. Tam WH, Lau WC, Cheung LP, Yuen PM, Chung TK. (2002). Intrauterine adhesions after conservative and surgical management of spontaneous abortion. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 9 (2): 182–185.

6. Goldenberg, M., Schiff, E.' Achiron, R.' Lipitz, S.' Mashiach, S. Managing residual trophoblastic tissue. Hysteroscopy for directing curettage. J Reprod Med. 1997;42(1)26-8.
 7. Yu D, Wong YM, Cheong Y, Xia E, Li TC. Asherman syndrome-one century later. Fertil Steril 2008;89(4):759-779.

8. Wolman I, Gordon D, Yaron Y, Kupferminc M, Lessing JB, Jaffa AJ. Transvaginal sonohysterography for the evaluation and treatment of retained products of conception. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2000;50:73-6.
 9. Alcazar JL. Transvaginal ultrasonography combined with color velocity imaging an dpulsed Doppler to detect residual trophoblastic tissue. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998; 11:54-8.

10. Achiron R, Goldenberg M, Lipitz S, Mashiach S. Transvaginal duplex Doppler ultrasonography in bleeding patients suspected of having residual trophoblastic tissue. Obstet Gynecol1993;81:507-11.
 11. Chung, TK, Cheung, LP, Leung, TY, Haines, CJ, and Chang, AM. Misoprostol in
the management of spontaneous abortion. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995;102(10):832-
5.

12. Macrow, P and Elstein, M. Managing miscarriage medically. BMJ 1993;306(6882):876.
 13. Demetroulis, C, Saridogan, E, Kunde, D, and Naftalin, AA. A prospective randomized control trial comparing medical and surgical treatment for early pregnancy failure. Hum Reprod 2001;16(2):365-9.

14. McKee M, Priest P, Ginzlet M et al. Can out-of-hours operating in gynecology be reduced? Arch Emerg Med 1992;9:290-8.
 15. Moodliar S, Bagratee JS, Moodley J. Medical vs surgical evacuation of first-trimester spontaneous abortion. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2005;91:21-6.

16. Muffley, PE, Stitely, ML, and Gherman, RB. Early intrauterine pregnancy failure: a randomized trial of medical versus surgical treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187(2):321-5; discussion 325-6.
 17. Ballagh SA, Harris HA, Demasio K.Is curettage needed for uncomplicated incomplete spontaneous abortion? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;179:1279-82.
 18. Stovall, TG, Ling, FW, and Buster, JE. Outpatient chemotherapy of unruptured ectopic pregnancy. Fertil Steril 1989;51(3):435-8.
 19. Lipscomb, GH, Bran, D, McCord, ML, Portera, JC, and Ling, FW. Analysis of three hundred fifteen ectopic pregnancies treated with single-dose methotrexate. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;178(6):1354-8.
 20. Zhang, J, Gilles, JM, Barnhart, K, Creinin, MD, Westhoff, C, and Frederick, MM. A comparison of medical management with misoprostol and surgical management for early pregnancy failure. N Engl J Med 2005;353(8):761-9.

21. Hertig AT, Livingstone RG. Spontaneous, threatened and habitual abortion: their pathogenesis and treatment. N Engl J Med 1944;230:797-806.

22. Stockheim D, Machtinger R, Wiser A, Dulitzky M, Soriano D, Goldenberg M, Schiff E, Seidman D. A randomized prospective study of misoprostol or mifepristone followed by misoprostol when needed for the treatment of women with early pregnancy failure. Fertil Steril 86(4):956-60.
 23. World Health Organization Task Force on post-ovulatory methods of fertility regulation. Comparison of two doses of two doses of mifepristone in combination with misoprostol for early medical abortion: a randomized trial. BJOG 2000;107:524-30.
 24. Hausknecht RU. Methotrexate and misoprostol to terminate early pregnancy. N Engl J Med 1995;333:537-40.
 25. Peyron R, Auberny E, Targosz V, Silvestre L, Renault M, Elkik F et al. Early termination of pregnancy with mifepristone (RU 486) and the orally active prostaglandin misoprostol. N Engl J Med 1993;328:1509-13.
 26. Spitz IM, Bardin CW, Benton L, Robbins A. Early pregnancy termination with mifepristone and misprostol in the United States. N Engl J Med 1998;338:1241-7.
 27. Creinin MD, Huang X, Westhoff C, Barnhart K, Gilles JM, Zhang JZ. Factors related to successful misoprostol treatment for early pregnancy failure. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107(4):901-907.

28. Pang MW, Lee TS, Chung TKH. Incomplete miscarriage: a randomized controlled trial comparing oral with vaginal misoprostol for medical evacuation. Hum Rep 2001;16(11):2283-7.
 29. Chung TKH, Cheung LP, Sahota DS et al. Spontaneous abortion: short term complications following either conservative or surgical management. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 38:61-4.
 30. Blanchard K, Taneepanichskul S, Kiriwat O, Sirimai K, Svirirojana N, Mavimbela N, Winikoff B. Two regimens of misoprostol for treatment of incomplete abortion. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2004;103(5 Pt1): 860-5.
 31. Shaw, D. Misoprostol for reproductive health: Dosage recommendations. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2007; 99:S155.

32. ACOG Committee on International Affairs. Committee Opinion: Misoprostol for postabortion care. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2009; 113(2) Part I:465-8.

Database of ObGyns who offer misoprostol for treatment of miscarriage

As I've mentioned before, in some countries there are not many ObGyns who offer misoprostol (Cytotec) for treating missed or incomplete miscarriages. This is unfortunate because it is known to be effective and does not carry the risks and potential complications such as infertility that standard care D&C does.

All women should be given a choice in the treatment of their own bodies, provided that their decision does not put their own life at risk.

Therefore I'm putting together a database of Obgyns from all over the world who do offer women the choice of medical management (eg. misoprostol/cytotec, mifepristone) so that women will have a resource if they find themselves in need.

If you are either a patient who has been treated with drugs for managing miscarriage, or a doctor who believes in a patient's right to choose and are experienced in the use of medical management of miscarriage, please contact me on:

ashermansprevention@gmail.com

Thank you.

Note to Doctors: Let me know if you have any concerns about having your names made public. I can always keep the database private and offer the names of doctors in specific areas confidentially to those who request it.

Miscarriage management after Asherman’s syndrome

Unfortunately, I can now talk from experience about how miscarriages can be dealt with post Asherman’s syndrome (AS), and what to expect. I lost my pregnancy at 14 weeks due to a trisomy 21 detected by karyotype analysis and QF-PCR of chorionic villi sampling. The first inkling that something was wrong was at the 12 week scan. Actually, the blood serum levels of PAPP-A and bHCG I’d had during the 11th week already showed a problem, but it wasn’t until my ultrasound that I learned of this. The ultrasound only confirmed that things were not right. Only two weeks earlier I’d had another ultrasound and all seemed fine- the heart beat, the CRL, etc. Now the nuchal fold measured 7mm and there was hydrops- an accumulation of fluid around the fetus. I was told there was a high probability that the pregnancy would end spontaneously.

Fast forward to week 14 and there was no longer a heartbeat.

I’d always talked about misoprostol and ironically now I would have to use it myself. There was no way on earth I’d undergo another D&C (suction curettage or whatever you want to called this blind invasive procedure)- the procedure which caused Asherman’s syndrome when I had it 3 years earlier for a blighted ovum. I could not risk exacerbating the condition. If only my initial ObGyn had agreed to treat me with misoprostol I could have avoided all the surgery and heart ache that followed. I’m quite sure I’d have a child by now.

Since I was relatively far into the pregnancy and the fetus had developed to 14 weeks before dying spontaneously, I booked in the hospital for the misoprostol induction. I don’t know which hospitals/ObGyns use misoprostol regularly, however, in the interest of informing women, my procedure was performed at the Royal Hospital for Women in Randwick (Sydney). I’m sure there are other hospitals (and doctors) that are familiar with misoprostol use, and yes, it is completely legal even if it has not been approved by the TGA (Australia's equivalent of the FDA) for gynecological indications for dubious reasons. By the way, the doctor who refused to give me misoprostol works at St George Hospital. I’d be interested to know if that hospital carries out medical management of miscarriage- please drop me a line or comment below if you know.

In total, I was given a dose of 1 mg (milligram) of misoprostol over the course of a day. Initially, one pill ie. 200 mcg (vaginal) was given to test for any adverse reactions, allergies etc. I began cramping but there was no bleeding. About 5 hours later cervical dilation was checked (closed) and I was given 400 mcg (2 pills). The cramping intensified, but again, there was no bleeding. Shortly after my third and final dose, about 5 hours after the last dose, I began having strong contractions. It was quite painful so I’d definitely recommend panadeine forte. Strangely, there was still no bleeding unlike with my first miscarriage which began like a period. About 40 minutes after my final dose, the waters broke and amniotic fluid spilled out soaking the bed. After this point the pain stopped although I was still feeling crampy for at least a week afterwards. Roughly half an hour after the waters broke, I delivered the tiny baby. The umbilical cord was thin and weak and broke off from the placenta. It is at this point that I began bleeding. I continued bleeding heavily throughout the night and the next day. I also bled strongly for about a week afterwards and on and off during the following week. The placenta should have come out soon afterwards but it was not until 3.5 hours passed that it did. Luckily I’d discussed the possibility of retained placenta previously with my ObGyn and we agreed to wait it out (normally most doctors would jump at the opportunity to do a D&C in this situation) while the nurses and midwives monitored me closely for signs of infection and hemorrhage. As it’s difficult to know if the placenta is complete on visual inspection, and women with a history of Asherman’s syndrome- even after surgical correction- are at an increased risk of placental conditions such as placenta accreta, percreta, increta, and previa, I knew retained placenta was a possibility.

Before the placenta delivered my temperature reached 40 C and the midwife was somewhat concerned, however misoprostol itself can cause fever. The morning after, my blood pressure was 90 on 60 (normally it is around 110-115/65-70) and I was told this could be due to blood loss.

The next morning I underwent an ultrasound to check for retained placental fragments. Around 32 mls of material was found in the uterus but it was impossible to tell whether this was simply blood and blood clots, or if there were retained products of conception (RPOC). Doppler flow analysis suggested that there were retained placental fragments in the posterior of the uterus- the same area where the placenta had implanted in this pregnancy. I had another ultrasound a week after the first. The second ultrasound showed that the fluid in the uterus had roughly halved, but it was still not possible to tell for sure via ultrasound whether there were retained products.

In the following week I bled little despite having around 18 mls of content in my uterus so I became concerned that perhaps there were retained fragments. This would not be a surprise given my pregnancy reached second trimester and my previous history of Asherman’s syndrome. I contacted my trusted Asherman’s syndrome specialist for a hysteroscopic procedure to remove any retained fragments of placenta. This procedure was done 3 weeks after the misoprostol treatment. It turns out I did have many retained fragments which were gently scraped off using the hysteroscope itself. Luckily I did not have any clinical infection from the retained tissue (perhaps just 'subclinical' ;) ?). There were no adhesions. I was given prophylactic antibiotics to prevent infection after the surgery.

I should also mention that to prevent any possible adhesions, I was prescribed 2mg/day progynova (a synthetic estrogen) for 28 days by an Asherman’s syndrome specialist. The other option was Premarin (0.625 mg). These help the endometrium grow and thereby prevent uterine walls from adhering in the case of scarring.

I’m now awaiting my next period after which I’ll have a mid cycle scan to measure endometrial thickness at ovulation, and either an in--office hysteroscopy or an HSG to check for adhesions. Hopefully the removal of RPOCs did not cause any scarring.
Note that the dose of misoprostol I was given was decided according to my pregnancy stage (14 weeks) and status (fetal demise). Doses vary and guidelines should be adhered to.


Here is a summary of my suggestions (as a non MD) if you find yourself in this situation:

1. Don’t have a D&C for a miscarriage as it can cause further damage especially if you have had AS previously. Also, your endometrium may get thinner each time you have a D&C.


2. Misoprostol helps clear out most of the uterine contents. It is more painful than a D&C but worth it in the long run- unless you are not interested in preserving your fertility. NOTE: If you have had a previous Cesarean section or uterine perforation or severe AS, discuss with your ObGyn to see if misoprostol is safe for you (or you may need to take a lower dose than what I was given).

3. You should have estrogen therapy to prevent adhesions from forming. I'm not sure if this is 100% necessary but Asherman's specialists recommend it. Some women didn't use it because of adverse reactions to estrogen (blood clots etc.) and they did not develop adhesions.
4. You will probably have retained tissue and require a hysteroscopy (not a blind D&C!!) to remove it. In most cases if you have had a missed miscarriage you will need to either use misoprostol or, alternatively, wait to miscarry before hysteroscopy can be effective, otherwise there is just too much tissue and blood to work with.

5. Have a mid cycle scan to measure endometrial thickness after your first post-treatment period and always check that your uterine cavity is free of adhesions before you attempt to conceive again just in case. An in-office hysteroscopy is best but failing that, an HSG can be done.

There are also some implications that can be speculated:

1. It may take a few hours for the placenta to deliver when using misoprostol post AS if you are beyond the first trimester.

2. It is likely that if you have had AS, you will have retained products after every future miscarriage. Hysteroscopic removal of tissue allows the doctor to view your uterus as he/she clears it. Note: Hysteroscopy itself can cause complications if undertaken by an unexperienced or unskilled doctor. Please see only a highly experienced specialist.

3. You should anticipate that you may have placenta accreta in a future pregnancy particularly if the placenta does not deliver when expected or you have had confirmed RPOC. Obviously, any woman with past AS should be monitored throughout their pregnancy by a high-risk Obstetrician.

I will try to write about the known pregnancy complications in women with a history of AS in the near future.

There are two more interesting points: Initially I believed that I may not get RPOC because the placenta had implanted in a region which was never affected by intrauterine adhesions. The fact that it is possible to get RPOC in a new, previously unaffected area suggests that perhaps the placenta implants deeply because the endometrium is slightly thinner than it should be ideally. Or maybe blood flow to the uterus is somehow affected and in order for the pregnancy to establish the placenta needs to invade the endometrium more deeply.

Secondly, I have to question once again whether there is any truth at all to the unfounded claim by certain doctors that Asherman’s syndrome can occur ‘spontaneously’ after miscarriage. I would have to have actual evidence to believe this. In my own case I had no adhesions 2 weeks after miscarrying using misoprostol-and this is even after having had intrauterine adhesions in the past (from a D&C). In other words they did not reoccur, nor did any new ones develop. I suspect that if I was treated with blind D&C rather than misoprostol, lo and behold I would develop ‘spontaneous’ adhesions in a new region: the posterior region of my uterus (where the RPOC were). It doesn't make sense for such an evolutionarily destructive mechanism to occur in nature (unless extremely rarely).

In retrospect, I have to wonder why my first Obgyn (ie the one who caused me to have AS) so steadfastly rejected my request to use misoprostol instead of a D&C when it can be used even until the third trimester. He made me believe that it could only be used until 8 or 10 weeks. I also wonder why, as a doctor who was aware about Asherman’s syndrome, my strong concern about acquiring it, and knew of the Asherman’s syndrome support group, he did not refer me for a hysteroscopic removal the supposed RPOC I had? What, may I ask, is the purpose of informing gynecologists about Asherman’s syndrome if they will continue to perform damaging D&Cs while refusing to offer other options? ‘Consent’ for D&Cs is hardly possible when other options are not made available. Please, let us not make Obstetricians/gynecolgists believe that treatment is so simple and effective that causing Asherman’s syndrome is just a little glitch with few consequences for the patient.

Finally, my experience has shown once again that prevention of Asherman’s syndrome is best: the condition leads to a cycle of costly and lengthy complications with retained products (not to mention possible obstetric complications in future pregnancies) which could be avoided if medical management (ie. misoprostol) was used in the first instance.

Misprostol for miscarriage management to prevent Asherman's syndrome

Misoprostol (also known as Cytotec produced by Pfizer) is a synthetic prostaglandin E1 analogue which causes uterine contractions that empty the uterus. Initially developed for the treatment of gastric ulcers, misoprostol was found to have numerous gynecological indications including treatment of missed or incomplete miscarriage (or termination), or retained placenta following full term delivery, postpartum hemorrhaging (PPH) and labour induction. The advantage of using misoprostol for miscarriage/retained placenta management is the avoidance of the invasive, costly and potentially damaging D&C procedure (eg. Asherman's syndrome).

Misoprostol is on the WHO essential medicine list for abortion induction (in combination with mifepristone) and labour induction. Earlier this year the ACOG published a committee opinion supporting the worldwide availability of misoprostol for postabortion care (both spontaneous and induced), acknowledging its ability to prevent needless deaths in developing nations (1). It has been approved in more than 85 countries since 1985. Yet in all but 4 countries (France, Brazil, Taiwan and Egypt) it has only been approved for use in gastric ulcers. It seems that the major obstacle to the US’s FDA approval of misoprostol for gynecological indications is the original manufacturer's refusal to permit the drug to be used for pregnancy-related applications for moral rather than medical reasons: misoprostol can also be used for terminations (2). As long as those with other agendas can proclaim that misoprostol is 'not FDA (or TGA in Australia) approved' and is being used ‘off-label’, they can continue to at least imply that the reasons for this are safety-related, creating fear or uncertainty in patients and doctors alike. In fact, misoprostol is one of the most widely studied prostaglandins and has undergone hundreds of clinical trials for over 20 years. In comparison, by today's high safety and medical ethics standards, there is little doubt that the century-old blind, invasive D&C would fail to gain approval for routine use. Off label use of medication is not only legal, it is also safe when backed by years of clinical trials assessing safety. Unbeknownst to many, off label use of other Obstetric drugs is commonplace.

Could there be another underlying conflict in the D&C versus misoprostol/medical management- a hidden competition between doctors who perfom surgery and the pharmaceutical industry which produces the drug over financial gain from miscarriages/terminations? From the publications of some doctors at least it would appear that the pharmaceutical industry bowing to anti-abortion lobbyists (2) is the main obstacle rather than the collective rejection of doctors to use misoprostol. Having said this, some doctors remain ignorant about its use and hesitant to learn more. More needs to be done to educate doctors on the use of misoprostol for medical management of miscarriage, beginning in medical school where they are instead trained to peform D&Cs for just about every gynecological condition encountered.

To date there is one randomized control trial comparing the use of misoprostol to D&C for treatment of miscarriage with regards to intrauterine adhesion outcomes. Not surprisingly, this study suggests misoprostol would reduce the incidence of intrauterine adhesions (3). Although these results seem intuitive, in medicine (and science) studies are always needed as evidence, especially when a ‘standard’ treatment is to be usurped by a newer method which some doctors seem inexplicably reluctant to embrace. More such studies would also be helpful in putting to rest the ‘subclinical’ infection myth or other unsubstantiated hypotheses on the etiology of Asherman’s syndrome which somehow shift blame away from instrumentation to a yet unproven and uncharacterized patient factor (eg. patient constitution or a ‘naturally’ occurring physiological phenomenon in the absence of surgery).

Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons Gynecological/Obstetric practice has been slow to keep up with research with regards to the use of medical management for miscarriage. Although there are thankfully some doctors who have incorporated misoprostol management of miscarriage into their arsenal of treatments, my experience is that they are far too few and far between at least in some countries. This is inexcusable given the risks of infertility and future obstetric complications in women who have undergone D&C, still regarded as the 'standard care' for treating missed or incomplete miscarriages. Not only is misoprostol effective, it can be used in both first and second trimester pregnancy losses.

The misoprostol.org website provides a useful table summarizing guidelines for using misoprostol for different obstetric indications and at different stages of pregnancy. Like any drug, it must be used according to guidelines and under medical supervision.

I also came across a very helpful website where women shared their experiences with using misoprostol for miscarriage.

I am adding the site to the links to the right of this blog in the hope that it will help enlighten women to the existence of medical management and what to expect. It is a longer process to use misoprostol (and more painful particularly if used for second trimester losses), however these disadvantages pale significantly against the potential complications of D&C. The more women who become aware about Asherman's syndrome and future high risk pregnancies, the more will request misoprostol treatment, hopefully forcing changes in practice and policies of standard treatment for miscarriage.

REFERENCES

1. ACOG. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 427: Misoprostol for postabortion care.
Obstet Gynecol 2009;113(2 Pt 1):465-8.

2. Misoprostol and the debate over off-label drug use (Commentary): BJOG: an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
March 2005, Vol. 112, pp. 269–272. Link to full pdf

3. Tam, WH, Lau, WC, Cheung, LP, Yuen, PM, and Chung, TK. Intrauterine
adhesions after conservative and surgical management of spontaneous abortion. J
Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2002;9(2):182-5.

‘Victims’ in miscarriage headlines are luckier than they think

Oh no. Not another story about a woman who goes to hospital emergency with an impending miscarriage and gets given painkillers and told to go home (click here for 'story'). Or miscarries in the hospital toilet. I don’t know why, but Sydney newspapers abound with such stories. It started off with the famous Jana Horska story. Yesterday I read in the Sydney Morning Herald that women will now be offered D&Cs straight away. OK, I’ve kept silent long enough. When women think that miscarriage and the pain that goes with it are the worst things than can happen to them, I must enlighten them about Asherman’s syndrome. Especially when their complaints have prompted hospitals to consider carrying out even more D&Cs, the number one cause of Asherman’s syndrome.

One in four pregnancies ends in miscarriage. I too had a miscarriage so I know what I’m talking about. I was around 14 weeks into the pregnancy. Mine was a missed miscarriage detected via ultrasound at 11 weeks. The fetus either died (fetal demise) and was resorbed or stopped developing very early on (anembryonic gestation). I was offered a D&C straight away by my ObGyn. I recalled vaguely hearing about the risks of D&C and future fertility. I was 39 and was not about to take a chance. My ObGyn insisted that Asherman’s syndrome and uterine perforation were ‘extremely rare’ (see what the real incidence rates are. Not rare at all!). Still, if there was a chance I could avoid it altogether by waiting to miscarry naturally, I would take that option. I had no other choice as he flatly refused to give me medication (misoprostol). The ObGyn was visibly irritated and disappointed in my choice to avoid a D&C.

The shock and sadness of losing the pregnancy was soon replaced with impatience to miscarry naturally so I could avoid a D&C, and start trying to conceive again with my fertility intact. My goal was to avoid a D&C at all costs. I was relieved when one Sunday morning about 3 weeks later, I finally began to bleed. At first it was like a normal period. As the day progressed the bleeding got heavier, and so did the cramps. By 11 PM I could no longer contain my cries of pain. My husband shut the windows, worried the neighbours might think he was beating me! Finally around midnight when I could no longer stand the pain I sent my husband to an all night pharmacy to get the strongest painkiller available without prescription. He tried to convince me to go to the hospital instead. “Are you nuts?” I retorted. “They’ll just tell me to have a D&C”. Not only that, but I’d have to stifle my moans and sit upright in uncomfortable clothes, surrounded by strangers and without access to a clean toilet. At home I could make as much noise as I wanted in my loose nighty and stand on all fours if that was the most comfortable position. The toilet was less than a meter from my bed and I wouldn’t have to compete with 50 other patients for it while waiting in emergency. He came back with a box of Panadeine forte containing codeine and that took the edge off the labour-like cramps. At some point after midnight I felt a ‘pop’ and instantaneous relief. Instinctively I knew the gestational sac must have burst and I rushed to the toilet. I continued to bleed heavily but was glad everything was coming out.

Later that day I had an appointment with the ObGyn who seemed rather disappointed that I miscarried by myself. Somewhat wistfully, he said that on ultrasound it appeared that there was no remaining tissue. What a relief that was to hear. But for some reason, he insisted I return a few days later to make sure everything was OK. When I returned later that week his story changed. This time he said it appeared that I had large ‘products of conception’ and that I had no other choice than to have a D&C. What??? I asked about drugs again. He refused again, saying they would be ‘ineffective.’ Reluctantly, I had the D&C, got stage 3 Asherman’s syndrome and the rest is history. (Here’s my story).

I’m convinced that the D&C was needless. I lost my fertility for no reason at all.

I wonder if these women who are sent home without a D&C realize how lucky they are to not go through what I did? Instead of noticing something is wrong with their periods, or are no longer able to conceive or miscarry repeatedly… instead of having to find a doctor who believes them and who is aware about the existence of Asherman’s syndrome and is trained to diagnose it with hysteroscopy… instead of having to undergo hysteroscopic surgery and hormone therapy to remove adhesions and salvage any viable endometrium in the hope that they will be able to have a baby in future… they get to try to conceive again right away with any complications whatsoever! And they’re the ones who are complaining! As a victim of D&C, I guarantee you, a miscarriage is nothing compared to the pain of possible loss of fertility and serious future pregnancy complications from D&C.

I wonder, do these women realize that there is absolutely nothing any hospital or doctor can do to stop the miscarriage from happening? They probably miscarried because the babies were not normal and there is unfortunately nothing that can change that. If they really want to be of help, they should insist that hospitals offer medical management with misoprostol and mifepristone in addition to expectant management, which also evacuates the uterus safely. Instead, I fear their indignant cries have resulted in a policy to systematically use D&C to manage miscarriage and will result in an increase in Asherman’s syndrome cases.

When will the lesson be learned? What is the world coming to when no one says a word about the risks of reproductive mutilation from systematic blind D&C, yet C-sections and male circumcision are made out to be the most dangerous,needless and wicked surgery known to humankind?!


Related link:

Here is a youtube clip I made about miscarriage management

This is another website which aims to raise awareness about the risks of D&C: http://www.dandcnow.info/